How are swords still have a sharp edge after blocking so many direct slashes from a sharp tempered blade.
Imo sword should look like saws after even one session of blocking really anything made of metal.
In: 1711
While swords can develop nicks along the blade during prolonged combat, there’s a few things to keep in mind:
– most battlefield fighting actually utilized spears over swords, as they provided a ranged advantage
– if you were planning to engage on the battlefield with a sword, you likely also carried a shield into the battle. It was very, very rare for a soldier to only bring a sword with no defensive tool
– most sword on sword fights are very short, either because swords are very lethal or because many armored sword fights actually turned into grappling matches ending with one opponent beating the other to death or pulling out a dagger
– for a sword blade to get seriously nicked, it needs to be hit very, very hard, at a very oblique angle. At a shallow angle the blades will slide along one another (potentially leading to some of the edge shaving off but no nick), and even at the correct angle to cause damage not every strike is strong enough to deform the edge
[EDIT] To address some comments:
– my original 4th point was meant to address those rare cases where two blade edges made contact. In most cases, a blocked strike would involve the attacking blade’s edge meeting the parrying blade’s flat. Edge on edge contact did happen in some cases, like if the parrying fighter was caught off guard, but European sword treatises discouraged it where possible.
– most strikes are not delivered at full strength, especially during UN armored combat. Usually you will probe your opponent’s defenses, and only commit to a real attack when you feel certain you have an opening (and even then it doesn’t take that much force to seriously would someone). On the defending side, it’s better to parry using the minimal force required. This is because it conserves your strength, and because it’s actually easier to control your opponent’s blade when it remains in contact with or close to yours rather than trying to fling it to the side
– *what if a sword strikes a shield?* in that case the blade edge will typically roll, since the “point” of contact is much longer, rather than chipping
– *what about eastern swords like the katana or dao?* I’m not the person to ask here, but would love to hear from people more familiar with these weapons
How do you know swords don’t look like saws after proper sword fights? Most swords you see in museums are the best preserved and best looking examples of the time. An edge to edge clash will ruin that part of the edge just like you’ll ruin part of your kitchen knives edge if you slam it against a metal counter.
However even a ruined edge won’t “look like a saw” at a glance most of the time as the chipping of each impact will be relatively small since tempered steel is more likely to break entirely then get a proper “sawtooth”.
You’re not wrong, but… Not all swords were made of great steel. Not all were made with great techniques. On top of that they were often a backup weapon, either never needed or not used before the owner died.
Also depends on the type of sword, of course.
Add to that what I mentioned before, that the ones that survived were well made and properly used. For one of those to break, you’re right. Rare, and brought home by a surviving owner. But *devastating* if it happened so who would risk it unless it was that or get killed?
ITT: a lot of people who assume edge on edge parries are rare and have no idea how actual sword combat works but answer very confidently as if they do.
Gouges in steel are small. Binding is incredibly important to swordplay. Masterstrikes are the ‘ideal’ parry and are varied, but the idea is not to redirect the opponent’s sword away from your body, the idea is to intercept their strike with your own strike. Can’t hit you if you strike them in such a way to block their sword and slice them open at the same time.
These are literally very basic longsword concepts and apply to most other sword styles in general.
Swords aren’t THAT soft.
They often do have tiny nicks and deformations in them which dulls them after being used too often. But they are designed to be hard to dent which is why they are made of metal.
[removed]
Most swords are made of tempered steel; not copper. Any damage sustained by an edge block is gonna be too small to see with the naked eye.
That said, it is happening. Take a look under a magnifier, and you’ll see it. That’s all dulling is; Micro-imperfections.
The other thing is that most fights weren’t like they are in the movies. You’d be lucky to have 3 exchanges before somebody FUBARed and ate the blade… Or until my buddy came up behind you and stabbed you in the back.
[removed]
In Japan, several of the swordfighting schools teach to parry and deflect incoming sword strikes with the back of the blade specifically to avoid getting the edge badly chipped.
Battles in history and battles in movies have very little in common. Most screen battles immediately devolve into a chaotic furball of isolated fights because it looks intense and allows the story teller to pair up specific characters. In truth battles were far more ordered: blocks of soldiers “pushing” on each other stabbing with spears and blocking with shields. A terrifying place to be but still waaaay better than a Hollywood fight… as long as your front line holds together. If that stops being the case your best bet was to drop everything and run as fast as you could. In a movie battle you would have no idea which of these folks are your enemies and which are your friends. You literally couldn’t fight like that.
So we already see a few key differences:
* you’re not using swords, you’re using spears or spear like weapons such as halberds.
* you’re not hitting weapons with weapons. You’re hitting people or shields
* it’s also much more of psychological fight, trying to get the other side to run than just trying to kill as many as you can
So battles are out. That’s not what swords were used for. Swords are personal weapons used for defense, duels and such. But even there Hollywood lies to us. Movies use heavy forceful blows to convey aggression and strength and wide sweeping blows to convey skill, discipline and elegance. These moves are also easy to follow for a layperson. The problem is they are also easy to follow for your opponent. If your opponent knows what your weapon will be doing for the next second(s) then they have that time to do whatever they want and you are not in a position to react to it. “Winding up” for a big powerful strike just gives your opponent a free pass to stab you in the face.
Movies have also settled on this idea that a good sword is heavy and the bigger a weapon the slower it is. But it makes up for it with more “POWER” – which is what you want to hammer through the opponent’s defenses. In practice swords are far more nimble than that and two handed ones just as much. So swords are extremely unlikely to bash into each other “hammer and anvil” style and more likely “dance” around each other, quickly repositioning and trying new angles until you have the opportunity to strike without being hit in return.
There are a great many clips on YouTube about historians and sword masters reacting to Hollywood fights.
Latest Answers